EGAN, P. J.
Plaintiff Kizer Excavating Co., an excavation subcontractor on a commercial construction project in Dallas, Oregon, seeks reconsideration of our opinion holding that the trial court erred in determining that plaintiff could recover damages on its quantum meruit claim, and holding that defendant Stout Building Contractors, LLC, the general contractor, is entitled to judgment and attorney fees on plaintiffs breach of contract claim. Kizer Excavating v. Stout Building Contractors, 324 Or 211, 525 P3d 883 (2023). We write to allow reconsideration to correct our misstatement at 324 Or App at 219 n 2, that plaintiff did not dispute that defendants challenge in its first assignment of error on cross-appeal was preserved. Plaintiff did, in fact, argue that the argument made in the first assignment of error was not preserved. As we previously noted at 324 Or App at 219 n 2, given the way the case was tried, we conclude that the argument made in the first assignment of error was preserved. As corrected, the footnote now reads:
“We view defendants argument as the equivalent of a contention that the court mis-instructed itself on the law in concluding that the denial of the change order rendered the additional excavation extracontractual. Given the manner in which the case was litigated, we conclude that defendants challenge is preserved.”
Reconsideration allowed; opinion modified and adhered to as modified.
EGAN, P. J.